Proposal: Core-Team-Tharp-and-Clark-0518

[glennaustin]

This proposal is cross-posted at https://www.dashcentral.org/p/core-team-tharp-and-clark-0518

Proposal background
This proposal funds the fee for the Tharp & Clark “T&C” visual brand identity. T&C is a branding design firm that has been engaged by the Dash network to redesign its visual identity concept. During the March budget cycle, two independent proposals were submitted to the network for consideration and the T&C visual identity proposal was selected as the final design for the Dash network. The link to the T&C submission is: https://www.dash.org/forum/threads/proposal-visual-identity-tharp-clark.33043/

The contract with T&C
The contract with T&C stipulates a payment of 88,000 € based on the achievement of 2 milestones:

Milestone 1
The Dash network entered into a contract with T&C stipulating that if their visual identity strategy were chosen, T&C would receive a payment of 44,000 € for the initial branding work that was performed on behalf of the network. This invoice is currently being processed as the contract stipulated that payment is due upon confirmation that the visual identity was chosen by the network.

Milestone 2
An additional 44,000 € will be due to T&C upon completion of milestone 2: the artwork and visual guidelines.

Specifically, T&C is to deliver:

Artwork
Creation of the final artworks of the master logotype and the rest of the logotypes from the brand architecture to ensure its correct reproduction.

Visual guidelines
Once the new logotype and look & feel has been finalized, T&C will normalize the new visual identity of Dash through a brand guideline of 10-20 pages that lets the network control the use and implementation of the brand identity system. These guidelines will include the creative concept explanation, the graphic construction of the logotype, palette, its dimensions and proportions and its application in different backgrounds.

Milestone 2 is expected to be completed by the end of April.

Budget impact
If this proposal doesn’t pass Dash Core Group is contractually obligated to pay the fee from its marketing budget with funds earmarked for other marketing projects.

If you have any questions, please direct them to @Fernando in the original Forum post.

Requested funding is as follows for the May 3rd budget cycle:

- 149.71 Dash for branding effort (44,000 € @ 293.90 € per Dash)
- 5.00 Dash proposal reimbursement

Total: 154.71 Dash

Manually vote YES on this proposal:
dash-cli gobject vote-many ffac1f5c4b84bed84d40a8db42b459c1dd33569db510c0389d5518ac33aa29dd funding yes
OR from the qt console:
gobject vote-many ffac1f5c4b84bed84d40a8db42b459c1dd33569db510c0389d5518ac33aa29dd funding yes

Manually vote NO on this proposal:
dash-cli gobject vote-many ffac1f5c4b84bed84d40a8db42b459c1dd33569db510c0389d5518ac33aa29dd funding no
OR from the qt console:
gobject vote-many ffac1f5c4b84bed84d40a8db42b459c1dd33569db510c0389d5518ac33aa29dd funding no

 

[UdjinM6]

...
... and the T&C visual identity proposal was selected as the final design for the Dash network.
...

This never happened. Due to the way those proposals were structured voting results can not be seen as a decision to change the design for the Dash network. T&C visual identity proposal won over the second proposal from O&M in a "which one of two candidates would you prefer" poll and was selected as a design to go forward with. Wether Dash network should actually use new design or not should be decided via a separate (properly structured) governance proposal after T&C completes Milestone 2.

 

[demo]

Budget impact
If this proposal doesn’t pass Dash Core Group is contractually obligated to pay the fee from its marketing budget with funds earmarked for other marketing projects.

Wow!
So the Dash Core Group (employee) decided to pay you, regardless the will of the MNOs (employer).
The employee decides, and the employer obeys.
Is this a revolution or something?

 

[Efietskop]

Proposal background
This proposal funds the fee for the Tharp & Clark “T&C” visual brand identity. T&C is a branding design firm that has been engaged by the Dash network to redesign its visual identity concept. During the March budget cycle, two independent proposals were submitted to the network for consideration and the T&C visual identity proposal was selected as the final design for the Dash network. The link to the T&C submission is: https://www.dash.org/forum/threads/proposal-visual-identity-tharp-clark.33043/#post-180466

This link is to a post further in the thread by JOL, who has the O&M logo as his avatar. This is confusing imo.

Should be: https://www.dash.org/forum/threads/proposal-visual-identity-tharp-clark.33043/

 

[glennaustin]

This link is to a post further in the thread by JOL, who has the O&M logo as his avatar. This is confusing imo.

Should be: https://www.dash.org/forum/threads/proposal-visual-identity-tharp-clark.33043/

Yes, completely agree. Link fixed - nice catch.

 

[Arthyron]

This never happened. Due to the way those proposals were structured voting results can not be seen as a decision to change the design for the Dash network. T&C visual identity proposal won over the second proposal from O&M in a "which one of two candidates would you prefer" poll and was selected as a design to go forward with. Wether Dash network should actually use new design or not should be decided via a separate (properly structured) governance proposal after T&C completes Milestone 2.

I agree with this assessment. If we're going to adhere to Dash's historic system of governance, this is the best way to ensure the branding choice is indeed the will of the network.

 

[masternube]

> Ogilvy has offered to do a reinterpretation of the current logo as part of their work.

Where is this? How can we vote on this without seeing O&M's "reinterpretation of the current logo"?

> Tharp and Clark visual identity proposal was selected

I'm pretty sure that proposal didn't pass.

> If this proposal doesn’t pass Dash Core Group is contractually obligated to pay the fee from its marketing budget with funds earmarked for other marketing projects.

Sounds like incredible misconduct. Please explain how this is possible.

 

[Arthyron]

> Ogilvy has offered to do a reinterpretation of the current logo as part of their work.

Where is this? How can we vote on this without seeing O&M's "reinterpretation of the current logo"?

> Tharp and Clark visual identity proposal was selected

I'm pretty sure that proposal didn't pass.

> If this proposal doesn’t pass Dash Core Group is contractually obligated to pay the fee from its marketing budget with funds earmarked for other marketing projects.

Sounds like incredible misconduct. Please explain how this is possible.

After a lengthy discussion, it seems that not everyone was on the same page in terms of how the "voting" was carried out. Apparently the agreement to pay T&C for the work they had done for the logo was between part of the Core Team and T&C predicated upon its success in the polling process instituted by Fernando, but was not approved by the entire Core Team or the standard Masternode Voting process of obtaining a greater degree of "Yes" votes than "No" votes *and* at least 10% of the votes or in other words a passing proposal. So this time the vote is going through to pay T&C for their work thus far (since their contribution was a gamble on their part) moving toward the 2nd Milestone.

What several MNOs and some members of Core--which, to be clear, is not yet consensus among MNOs or the entirety of the Core Team--believe should happen is if this round of funding for T&C is completed, a final MNO vote proposal should be put up for the T&C Logo to become the official one replacing the current one. What will actually transpire remains to be seen, but that's where we're at so far.

 

[masternube]

> After a lengthy discussion, it seems that not everyone was on the same page in terms of how the "voting" was carried out.

How can anyone not be on the same page? Dash only has one way to vote and it's fixed in the code. And there exists (at current time) no vote where the decision to adopt the T&C branding, or to pay for it, has passed.

> if this round of funding for T&C is completed, a final MNO vote proposal should be put up for the T&C Logo to become the official one replacing the current one.

Why would we want to fund it but not use it? It was T&C's decision to make something at the risk of not getting paid. You can't make something without being asked and then force others to pay for it. Do we just keep throwing away money at logos we don't want?

 

[Arthyron]

@masternube -- Yes, like I said, these were decisions made by members of the Core Team (but not all), and weren't hard, protocol level decisions. The decision to gauge interest according to a modified MN poll and to pay T&C for the work they'd done via submission if that poll went in their favor was made by members of the Core Team. The decision to finish paying out T&C from the Treasury (instead of from the Core Team budget) is up to the MNOs this cycle as per this proposal.

Whether or not "we" "want" to pay for the work done by T&C will be determined by this proposal. Whether it comes out of the Treasury or the Core budget will also be contingent on this proposal. The agreement to pay T&C in the first place was established by members of Core and T&C contingent on the outcome of the non-formal-voting poll, though as I already described, there wasn't consensus among Core as to how that was ultimately to be carried out, but that's Core's problem to sort out. We, the MNOs, have to decide whether we're going to support the proposal or not.